[Archived] Roque Santa Cruz Thread

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

So he isn't going to play until November?! That's bad news, I didn't think the injury was THAT bad.....

You are using the American way of looking at the date.

Try dd/mm/yy

[American]

NOBODY offered us 18 million in January. You can't throw away what is not offered.

We were offered a very large sum, but too late to find a replacement. This is from Williams.

[Steve Moss]

Still, if Santa Cruz is now fit and can score some goals in these last several games, then it will have been worth keeping him, even if the 10 million plus offers are off the table come summer.

[gumboots]

We were offered a very large sum, but too late to find a replacement. This is from Williams.

That's what I meant. You can't replace someone if you don't have the money in your bank to do so. City messed about and didn't offer what we wanted or needed until it was too late for it to be any use to us. We are better off with a striker who might play the odd cameo between now and the end of the season rather than no striker at all or a striker we've panic bought and then can't get off the books.

[philipl]

I understand Spurs offered £20m verbally on something like the 27th January and that prompted City to offer a similar number two days later (perhaps £20m, probably £18m). Spurs talked about beating the higher City number in the press but didn't go above £20m.

Prior to that, City were all mouth and no trousers.

Just as in the summer when they hit the press talking about having offered £12m when in reality their bid was £6m +£2m, they carried on with those tactics throughout January.

For all the bullshit numbers in the press and Rovers making their position very clear that an acceptable number had to be bid early enough for Rovers to recruit a replacement, the reality was that Gary Cook was toying with us compared with the eventually decisive move he made for Bellamy.

The Rovers management was left in the position of concluding that City were never really serious about wanting to buy Roque other than them wanting to do something on the cheapo cheapo.

There can be absolutely no question of blame being attached to Sam, John Williams or the Trustees about this whatsoever.

[thenodrog]

I understand Spurs offered £20m verbally on something like the 27th January and that prompted City to offer a similar number two days later (perhaps £20m, probably £18m). Spurs talked about beating the higher City number in the press but didn't go above £20m.

Prior to that, City were all mouth and no trousers.

Just as in the summer when they hit the press talking about having offered £12m when in reality their bid was £6m +£2m, they carried on with those tactics throughout January.

For all the bullshit numbers in the press and Rovers making their position very clear that an acceptable number had to be bid early enough for Rovers to recruit a replacement, the reality was that Gary Cook was toying with us compared with the eventually decisive move he made for Bellamy.

The Rovers management was left in the position of concluding that City were never really serious about wanting to buy Roque other than them wanting to do something on the cheapo cheapo.

There can be absolutely no question of blame being attached to Sam, John Williams or the Trustees about this whatsoever.

I have it on decent authority that City offered 25m on the last day BUT only to be paid over 3 years.

I think Hughes and Cook saw their money as being unresistable to us but were viewing us as relegation rivals and wanted to apply a double edged sword to our Prem survival hopes by weakening us without giving us the opportunity to adequatrely replace RSC. (Turns out they needn't have bothered In fact I wouldn't be suprised if RSC was simply getting completely fit and sorted for a summer move .)

[67splitscreen]

I have it on decent authority that City offered 25m on the last day BUT only to be paid over 3 years.

I think Hughes and Cook saw their money as being unresistable to us but were viewing us as relegation rivals and wanted to apply a double edged sword to our Prem survival hopes by weakening us without giving us the opportunity to adequatrely replace RSC. (Turns out they needn't have bothered In fact I wouldn't be suprised if RSC was simply getting completely fit and sorted for a summer move .)

I think we will find out this weekend, if he's fit he has to play now with the injury to JR.

Benni wont last 45 min up top on his own, we go to anfield at our peril with two up top.

[philipl]

I have it on decent authority that City offered 25m on the last day BUT only to be paid over 3 years.

I think Hughes and Cook saw their money as being unresistable to us but were viewing us as relegation rivals and wanted to apply a double edged sword to our Prem survival hopes by weakening us without giving us the opportunity to adequatrely replace RSC. (Turns out they needn't have bothered In fact I wouldn't be suprised if RSC was simply getting completely fit and sorted for a summer move .)

I have heard the £25m story as well but have never been convinced by it and had an angle from the City end which pointed to it not being the case.

Think the comment about RSC implying he is deliberately laying up for his move is well wide of the mark.

I wonder if ADUG really are going to inflict on football another window of that incompetent cowboy Cook shooting and missing, busting wage structures and generally paralysing the transfer market.

I think John Williams and Sam showed exemplary self-control in not blurting out what they really must have been feeling deep down about the conduct of Manchester City during January. It would have been colourful headline-making if they had, no doubt.

[CrazyIvan]

unresistable to us

Don't you mean irresistible?

I don't believe City ever offered 25m and offering it over 3 years is a joke. 25m straight up might have bought him (what a great investment that would have looked now) and Sam would have had a replacement, as it goes we've still got him and I hope he stays with us and is fit and healthy next season.

[waggy]

There can be absolutely no question of blame being attached to Sam, John Williams or the Trustees about this whatsoever.

i think there is,the money was too good for a guy who does not want to be hear,once a player wants out,he goes

[RibbleValleyRover]

Just because you sell a player for a large fee doesn't necessarily mean that all the money from that sale would be given to the manager to spend.

For example if Roque was sold to City for £15 million, do you honestly think Sam would have had £15 million to spend? IMO after the trust had got their taste it would probably be half of that, probably enough to bring in a replacement striker and not much else.

[gumboots]

i think there is,the money was too good for a guy who does not want to be hear,once a player wants out,he goes

Once again, what money? WE could have had it in the bank, but money has no chance of scoring goals. If he'd stayed fit, Santa Cruz had. End of.

[RevidgeBlue]

I understand Spurs offered £20m verbally on something like the 27th January and that prompted City to offer a similar number two days later (perhaps £20m, probably £18m). Spurs talked about beating the higher City number in the press but didn't go above £20m.

Prior to that, City were all mouth and no trousers.

Just as in the summer when they hit the press talking about having offered £12m when in reality their bid was £6m +£2m, they carried on with those tactics throughout January.

For all the bullshit numbers in the press and Rovers making their position very clear that an acceptable number had to be bid early enough for Rovers to recruit a replacement, the reality was that Gary Cook was toying with us compared with the eventually decisive move he made for Bellamy.

The Rovers management was left in the position of concluding that City were never really serious about wanting to buy Roque other than them wanting to do something on the cheapo cheapo.

There can be absolutely no question of blame being attached to Sam, John Williams or the Trustees about this whatsoever.

zzzz............. here we go again, why do you persist in making stuff up and presenting it as fact?

It doesn't make you look any more knowledgeable or "in the know" it just detracts from the more sensible posts you make.

[philipl]

zzzz back to you if you can stay awake long enough to read the precise words I used.

Not saying I know, simply sharing what I believe to have been the case and was freely posted on here back in January.

Sorry it doesn't fit with your agenda of having a go at the club, its management and ownership.

[Guest Vinjay606]

I recently read that Leslie is likely to be offered a new contract. Therefore with him retaining his position as manager it appears a bid is certain. I have no doubt there is a release clause and obviously they can meet virtually any fee.

So with Hughes likely staying there only one possible scenario could keep Cruz at this club.

[thenodrog]

Don't you mean irresistible? Yes sorry.

I don't believe City ever offered 25m and offering it over 3 years is a joke. Thats up to you.... why would I make it upt?

[thenodrog]

i think there is,the money was too good for a guy who does not want to be hear,once a player wants out,he goes

Explain Ooijer and Mokoena then? Ditto the Lucas Neill siuation. Anyway what would 8m buy us this year.

Never mind should we shouldn't we have sold him. Has anybody stopped to think the message that selling RSC whilst we are under deep threat of relegation and without lining up a top replacement would send out to the fans? It would likely have led to a repeat of the great post 1960 Cup final desertion. Lest we forget it took BRFC 30 years to get over that one.

[Guest Vinjay606]

Ticketing issues that alienated a lot of fans after that 1960 final wasn't it?

[thenodrog]

Ticketing issues that alienated a lot of fans after that 1960 final wasn't it?

Probably but the favourites being defeated 0-3 didn't help. Players on the gravy train as soon as the semi's were over. Dougans transfer request on the morning of the final etc etc. I don't rem it but you really need to ask older ones like Jimski or Fife. Point being thousands stopped going to Ewood from that day on because the players and club blatantly put money before the fans and before winning the FA cup for Blackburn.

[yoda]

Ticketing issues that alienated a lot of fans after that 1960 final wasn't it?

no, it was ticketing issues before the final, that and Dougan throwing his toys out of the pram

[Guest Vinjay606]

Yes ticketing issues before the final which caused considerable resentment for a long time afterwards. From what I've read they were quite justified in being upset.

[yoda]

Yes ticketing issues before the final which caused considerable resentment for a long time afterwards. From what I've read they were quite justified in being upset.

My father was one that got stiffed, it was not just the club to blame but the some of the players at the time.

[kandi]

Roque is close to full fitness,but the trip to Anfield could still come to soon,although it is hoped he will be ready in a fortnight,according to the Lancashire Telegraph.

[Blue n White Rover]

Roque is close to full fitness,but the trip to Anfield could still come to soon,although it is hoped he will be ready in a fortnight,according to the Lancashire Telegraph.

Hmm, where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, prior to the Spurs game

We'd be lucky to see him in a Rovers shirt from now till the end of the season, if you ask me.

[benhben]

Remind me again why we didnt sell him for the £20m + that was on offer. Hes been crocked ever since january and scored single figure goals this season. Did you know hes only scored double figure goals once in his career - last season. Personally Id have cashed in on him as well get perhaps half that figure for him in the summer.